News related to
platform

GEM SRILANKA is organized by the Ceylon Gem and Jewellery Traders Association (CGJTA).It has over 2,000 members covering key gem-producing regions in Sri Lanka, including Beruwala, Ratnapura, and Galle, providing a professional platform for gemstone industry professionals worldwide to network, collaborate, and explore the world of gemstones in depth.

The exhibition set new records in both scale and attendance

This edition of the exhibition featured a total of 150 booths, attracting a large number of local and international buyers. Mr. Sunil Handunnetti, Minister of Industry and Enterprise Development of Sri Lanka; Rizwan Naeem, Vice Chairman of CGJTA,Mr. Andrew Lucas, President of GUILD Gemology Education and active field gemologist, Ms Ruby Liu, President of GUILD Gem Laboratories, and other distinguished guests attended the event.

At the Gem Sri Lanka 2026 gemstone exhibition, exhibitors comprehensively showcased their professional expertise across all stages of the gemstone industry value chain. Covering key areas such as mining, cutting, polishing, and heat treatment, the exhibition was guided by the core values of integrity and transparency, ensuring consistently high professional standards throughout. At the same time, this edition presented an immersive experience showcasing the long and diverse history of Sri Lanka’s gemstone industry, with detailed introductions to the country’s renowned sapphires and star sapphires. A dedicated premium exhibition zone was also curated to highlight exceptional sapphires and high-end colored gemstone collections.

According to data from GUILD Gem Laboratories, the number of gemstone samples submitted during the exhibition reached a new record high, directly reflecting the strong activity of the Sri Lanka trading market and further indicating a recovery trend in the global gemstone market at the beginning of the year.”The colored gemstone market in 2025 continues to evolve in terms of supply chains and color preferences. Although the market faced numerous supply-side challenges in 2024, against the backdrop of current conditions in the diamond market and rising gold prices, colored gemstones still demonstrate strong potential to gain increased market share.”Andrew Lucas noted in the opening of the GUILD 2025 Colored Gemstone Market Report.

Sri Lanka — a world-renowned gemstone trading hub

Sri Lanka has a thriving and highly valuable trade in precious and semi-precious gemstones, earning international recognition for its high-quality gemstones as well as its exceptional cutting and finishing craftsmanship. The gemstones produced in Sri Lanka consistently meet—and often exceed—the highest industry standards.

The country has long occupied a pivotal position in the global gemstone industry, serving as an integrated global hub encompassing mining, cutting, treatment, and trade. Buyers from major markets such as Japan, India, and China continue to travel to Sri Lanka, where they can observe the entire colored gemstone supply chain. Supported by a deep-rooted gemstone culture, extensive expertise, and an innovative mindset, Sri Lanka has developed a keen understanding of global market dynamics.

In recent years, by combining rough gemstone sourcing from Africa, Madagascar, and Southeast Asia with its renowned local cutting craftsmanship, Sri Lanka has further strengthened its position in the global gemstone industry.

GUILD Made a Dual-Booth Appearance at Gem Sri Lanka

As an internationally recognized gemstone testing authority, GUILD has long been committed to the study of field gemology, collecting A-type reference samples from major mining regions around the world to provide global industry professionals with accurate, authoritative, and efficient testing services. Since the inception of the exhibition, GUILD has served as a Platinum Sponsor of Gem Sri Lanka for three consecutive editions. At this year’s event, GUILD made its first-ever dual-booth appearance, featuring both GUILD Gem Laboratories and GUILD Gemology Education.

At the GUILD Gem Laboratories booth, a team of senior gemologists from GUILD Beruwala offered 24–48 hour rapid testing services to exhibitors and buyers, covering gemstone identification, treatment detection, and related services, providing reliable support for global gemstone trading and procurement. During the exhibition, the 2025 GUILD Colored Gemstone Market Report was also launched in limited quantities, serving as an important reference for industry trends and market direction.

Making its debut, the GUILD Gemology Education booth focused on the knowledge needs of professionals from both domestic and international markets, comprehensively presenting GUILD’s education and training programs as well as its overseas study tours. The booth showcased the English editions of Journey of Gems, professional color charts, and the combined volume of Microscopic Wonders: A Gemstone Inclusion Atlas, all of which were warmly received by industry professionals from around the world.

Focusing on a global perspective, driving the advancement of industry development

GUILD will continue to deepen its presence in the international gemstone market, leveraging its professional expertise to support the transparency and standardization of the global gemstone industry. Working together with industry peers, GUILD aims to explore new possibilities in source-origin trade and looks forward to even more highlights at the next edition of Gem Sri Lanka.

The issuer is solely responsible for the content of this announcement.

This shift has gathered momentum as regulatory digital public infrastructure, rising smartphone penetration and instant payments have converged. Unified Payments Interface volumes continue to expand across peer-to-peer and merchant transactions, while account aggregation frameworks allow consent-based data sharing that reduces onboarding friction and credit assessment time. Against this backdrop, platform-led banking is emerging as a scalable engine for fintech growth, changing how products are designed, priced and distributed.

Large lenders and new-age banks have invested heavily in API layers that sit atop legacy cores, separating product logic from distribution. This architectural change allows fintechs to “plug” into regulated balance sheets without becoming banks themselves, “play” by composing features such as KYC, payments or credit scoring, and “scale” nationally without building costly compliance stacks. For banks, the appeal lies in fee income, wider distribution and better utilisation of capital through co-lending and embedded finance.

Executives across the sector say the platform approach has shortened product launch cycles from months to weeks. Consumer lending, merchant credit, wealth distribution and cross-border remittances have been early beneficiaries, with embedded finance extending to ride-hailing, e-commerce, logistics and software-as-a-service platforms. Small enterprises, long constrained by paperwork and collateral requirements, are gaining access to working capital through cash-flow based underwriting that draws on real-time transaction data.

The commercial logic is reinforced by economics. API monetisation—charging per call, per transaction or via revenue sharing—creates annuity-like income streams for banks. Fintechs gain variable cost structures that align expenses with growth. Analysts note that platforms with high uptime, predictable latency and robust documentation are attracting repeat developers, creating network effects similar to cloud marketplaces.

Regulatory guardrails remain central to the model’s credibility. Data localisation rules, customer consent standards and outsourcing guidelines shape how banks expose systems and how partners handle information. Supervisors have emphasised accountability, making licensed entities responsible for customer outcomes even when services are delivered through partners. This has pushed banks to strengthen vendor risk management, audit trails and incident response, while fintechs have had to mature governance and security practices.

Competition among banks has intensified around developer experience. Dedicated sandbox environments, self-serve onboarding and standardised APIs are becoming differentiators. Some lenders have carved out platform subsidiaries to attract talent and ring-fence technology risk, while others have partnered with specialist middleware firms to accelerate rollout. Public sector banks, once seen as slow movers, are also modernising stacks to participate in ecosystem distribution rather than cede ground.

The platformisation trend is reshaping balance-sheet strategies. Co-lending arrangements allow banks and non-bank financiers to share risk, with fintechs originating and servicing loans using data-driven models. In payments, banks are focusing on high-volume, low-cost rails while fintechs compete on user experience and value-added services. Wealth platforms are distributing mutual funds, bonds and insurance through APIs that streamline compliance and reporting.

Challenges persist. Legacy core systems can constrain throughput, requiring phased migrations that test execution discipline. Cybersecurity threats rise with greater connectivity, demanding continuous monitoring and zero-trust architectures. Pricing APIs too aggressively risks discouraging innovation, while underpricing leaves money on the table. There is also the question of differentiation: as APIs commoditise, banks must decide where to invest for unique value, whether in data analytics, sector-specific products or risk pricing.

Talent remains a pressure point. Demand for engineers fluent in financial protocols, security and scalable systems outstrips supply, pushing up costs. Cultural change inside banks—shifting from project delivery to product thinking—has proven as important as technology. Successful platforms tend to empower cross-functional teams, publish clear roadmaps and treat external developers as customers.

Government authorities are moving to compel smartphone manufacturers to submit portions of their operating system source code for mandatory security audits, escalating a standoff with global technology companies that warn such a requirement could undermine intellectual property protections and user privacy. The proposal, under discussion within policy circles in New Delhi, reflects mounting concern about cyber intrusions, supply-chain vulnerabilities and the growing role of mobile devices in payments, governance and national security.

Officials familiar with the matter say the plan would require vendors selling smartphones in the country to make critical software components available for inspection by government-approved laboratories. The focus would be on core operating system layers, firmware and security modules rather than consumer-facing applications. Proponents argue that access to code is essential to verify whether hidden vulnerabilities, backdoors or insecure update mechanisms could be exploited by hostile actors.

The push has brought the government into direct tension with companies such as Apple and Samsung, whose devices dominate the premium and mass-market segments. Executives and industry representatives have privately conveyed resistance, arguing that exposing proprietary code, even to auditors bound by confidentiality, creates unacceptable risks of leaks and reverse engineering. They also contend that global platforms already undergo extensive third-party security testing and comply with international standards.

At the heart of the debate is whether national security imperatives justify a departure from prevailing global norms. Countries including China and Russia operate regimes that allow state scrutiny of technology products, though often under opaque processes that foreign firms say are difficult to reconcile with commercial safeguards. Western regulators have largely relied on certification frameworks, vulnerability disclosure programmes and cooperation with vendors rather than direct access to source code. India’s approach, if formalised, would place it closer to the former camp, potentially setting a precedent for other large emerging markets.

Government officials counter that smartphones have become gateways to sensitive data far beyond personal communications. Devices are routinely used for digital identity verification, financial transactions and access to public services. Any systemic weakness could have cascading effects. They also point to a rise in sophisticated cyber operations attributed by security researchers to state-linked groups, arguing that reliance on vendor assurances is no longer sufficient.

The proposal is understood to be steered by the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology, which has expanded its remit in cybersecurity and digital governance. Policy discussions have examined models ranging from escrow-based code access, where source material is held by a trusted intermediary, to controlled on-site inspections without code being copied. Each option presents trade-offs between assurance and exposure.

Industry bodies warn that mandatory disclosure could chill investment and complicate product launches. Smartphone operating systems are developed on global codebases, updated frequently and protected by layers of licensing agreements with component suppliers. Altering that structure for a single market risks fragmenting development and delaying security patches. There are also concerns about reciprocity: once one jurisdiction demands code access, others may follow, multiplying compliance burdens.

Privacy advocates occupy an ambivalent position. Some support deeper scrutiny to ensure devices do not surreptitiously collect or transmit data. Others caution that state access to low-level software could itself become a vector for abuse if oversight is weak. They stress the need for transparent audit criteria, independent supervision and clear limits on how findings are used.

The commercial stakes are significant. India is one of the world’s largest smartphone markets by volume and a critical manufacturing hub under production-linked incentive schemes. Companies have invested heavily in assembly plants and local supply chains, betting on policy stability. A protracted dispute over code access could influence decisions on future capacity and research investment, even if an outright exit is unlikely.